On 01/20/2017 01:47 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 01/07, Archit Taneja wrote:+ +static struct clk *pll_14nm_postdiv_register(struct dsi_pll_14nm *pll_14nm, + const char *name, + const char *parent_name, + unsigned long flags, + u8 shift) +{ + struct dsi_pll_14nm_postdiv *pll_postdiv; + struct device *dev = &pll_14nm->pdev->dev; + struct clk_init_data postdiv_init = { + .parent_names = (const char *[]) { parent_name }, + .num_parents = 1, + .name = name, + .flags = flags, + .ops = &clk_ops_dsi_pll_14nm_postdiv, + }; + + pll_postdiv = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pll_postdiv), GFP_KERNEL); + if (!pll_postdiv) + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); + + pll_postdiv->pll = pll_14nm; + pll_postdiv->shift = shift; + /* both N1 and N2 postdividers are 4 bits wide */ + pll_postdiv->width = 4; + /* range of each divider is from 1 to 15 */ + pll_postdiv->flags = CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED; + pll_postdiv->hw.init = &postdiv_init; + + return clk_register(dev, &pll_postdiv->hw);Can you use clk_hw_register() and the variants instead? Same for the clk_provider calls in this patch.
Will do. Thanks, Archit -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
